Starship Asterisk*

The Orion Nebula in Visible and Infrared

Explanation: The Great Nebula in Orion is a colorful place. Visible to the unaided eye, it appears as a small fuzzy patch in the constellation of Orion. Long exposure, multi-wavelength images like this, however, show the Orion Nebula to be a busy neighborhood of young stars, hot gas, and dark dust. This digital composite features not only three colors of visible light but four colors of infrared light taken by NASA's orbiting Spitzer Space Telescope as well. The power behind much of the Orion Nebula (M42) is the Trapezium - four of the brightest stars in the nebula. Many of the filamentary structures visible are actually shock waves - fronts where fast moving material encounters slow moving gas. The Orion Nebula spans about 40 light years and is located about 1500 light years away in the same spiral arm of our Galaxy as the Sun.

<< Previous APOD

This Day in APOD

Next APOD >>

[/b]

Is it just me who has lost some appreciation for the Orion nebula shown in APOD so many times (at least 139 times since 1995, check archives, search for Orion and see how many hits you get) ? And, at times it's understandable to repeat it with different feature explained. But when there are gazillions of intriguing things in the universe, maybe we should try to cover them (we don't have enough days in our lifetime to show one each day). Right ? I know, some people like to see it again and again but for me, I get bored and get disappointed that APOD wasted 1 day (again !). I'd love to hear others' opinions/thoughts, I'm sure some will agree and many might ridicule me, that's fine. Thanks !

I'm a bit bored by all the Orion images, too. When it comes to the Orion Nebula, I like to see things that I'm not used to seeing.
At left is an image of something I myself find interesting, a part of the Orion Nebula called the Becklin-Neugebauer object.

Wikipedia wrote:
The Becklin–Neugebauer Object (BN) is an object visible only in the infrared in the Orion Molecular Cloud. It was discovered in 1967 by Eric Becklin and Gerry Neugebauer during their near-infrared survey of the Orion Nebula. It is at 05h 35m 14.11s −05° 22′ 22.7″

The BN Object is thought to be an intermediate-mass protostar. It was the first star detected using infrared methods and is deeply embedded within the Orion star-forming nebula, where it is invisible at optical wavelengths because the light is completely scattered or absorbed due to the high density of dusty material.

Star formation is going on in the Orion Nebula, and it's not just tiny dwarf stars that are being born there. That is interesting to me.

Ann

It's an ambitious image and I personally think the colors are far too emphasized, but I think it's great to see the attempt at combining visible and infrared wavelengths. It seems that all the structure is infrared while all of the colors are from visible wavelengths. No doubt I would have done it differently, but I still enjoy new takes on Orion, even if it is a very commonly imaged object.

Even I can see some new things in it. The Trapezium looks like an angry gnome with spiky hair, or a tornado that is spitting saliva in all directions, while the M43 region resembles one of the red or white spots of Jupiter.

Ann

Gosh, is the time soon coming when we finally say: OK, APOD, we are sick and tired of this stupid sky that we've seen in such gruesome detail, and so many times: get us ANOTHER and a BETTER sky! And do it NOW!

I have been coming to APOD for less than ten years and only periodically check the archives. Yes, there are a few gazillion objects out there to view, and new ones discovered daily, but I never get tired of seeing the wonder. If it is only a different perspective of a familiar face, that is okay with me. This at one time wannabe astronaut (physical limitations stopped that dream) still gets a thrill looking up even through someone else's eyes, even at the most familiar vistas.

heehaw wrote:Gosh, is the time soon coming when we finally say: OK, APOD, we are sick and tired of this stupid sky that we've seen in such gruesome detail, and so many times: get us ANOTHER and a BETTER sky! And do it NOW!

How about a different and less boring UNIVERSE??? Jeeze, if isn't the same old Orion Nebula, then its the same old Andromeda Galaxy, same old Virgo Group, same old space-time continuum... Yawn...

All joking aside, I do find it interesting that celestial vistas (yes, even the mundane and overused) seen through filters reveal features that visible light alone do not.

Ann wrote:Even I can see some new things in it. The Trapezium looks like an angry gnome with spiky hair, or a tornado that is spitting saliva in all directions, while the M43 region resembles one of the red or white spots of Jupiter.

Ann

The Orion Nebula is without doubt one of the most outstanding visual targets in our sky. I never tire of looking at it, despite having seen it countless times in over 50 years of viewing.

I must admit, though, that this photo baffles me. Despite the use of visible data, this image is so different from what one actually sees through a scope that I can't seem to find the Trapezium.

Ann, could you or someone else point it out to me?

It's so hard to evaluate the true shape of a cloud of gas and dust. I would be curious if the same technique that they used on the Eta Carinae Homunculus Nebula could be applied to this most well-known area of our galaxy to evaluate its 3D characteristics.

Not enough Moon shots.

Visual_Astronomer wrote:

Ann wrote:Even I can see some new things in it. The Trapezium looks like an angry gnome with spiky hair, or a tornado that is spitting saliva in all directions, while the M43 region resembles one of the red or white spots of Jupiter.

Ann

The Orion Nebula is without doubt one of the most outstanding visual targets in our sky. I never tire of looking at it, despite having seen it countless times in over 50 years of viewing.

I must admit, though, that this photo baffles me. Despite the use of visible data, this image is so different from what one actually sees through a scope that I can't seem to find the Trapezium.

Ann, could you or someone else point it out to me?

Here you can see today's APOD and an amateur image of the Orion Nebula side by side. In the amateur image, the Trapezium is very bright. It isn't very bright at all in today's APOD, where it is sort of fuzzy and pink. A pale "rope" is sticking out of it like an umbilical chord.

In both images, M43 is to the left of the Trapezium. In the amateur image, M43 is red, with a white star inside, and a brown, curving dust lane below it. In today's APOD, M43 is bluish, with a pale violet-ish shape above it and hanging down on the left side.

Can you see the Trapezium and M43 now?

Ann

ShaileshS wrote:Is it just me who has lost some appreciation for the Orion nebula shown in APOD so many times (at least 139 times since 1995, check archives, search for Orion and see how many hits you get) ? And, at times it's understandable to repeat it with different feature explained. But when there are gazillions of intriguing things in the universe, maybe we should try to cover them (we don't have enough days in our lifetime to show one each day). Right ? I know, some people like to see it again and again but for me, I get bored and get disappointed that APOD wasted 1 day (again !). I'd love to hear others' opinions/thoughts, I'm sure some will agree and many might ridicule me, that's fine. Thanks !

I love seeing many different things in the universe but I still find this image of the Orion Nebula quite thrilling! The only complaint(s) are that it's not a PN and also it's not north up.

Visual_Astronomer wrote:

Ann wrote:Even I can see some new things in it. The Trapezium looks like an angry gnome with spiky hair, or a tornado that is spitting saliva in all directions, while the M43 region resembles one of the red or white spots of Jupiter.

Ann

The Orion Nebula is without doubt one of the most outstanding visual targets in our sky. I never tire of looking at it, despite having seen it countless times in over 50 years of viewing.

I must admit, though, that this photo baffles me. Despite the use of visible data, this image is so different from what one actually sees through a scope that I can't seem to find the Trapezium.

Ann, could you or someone else point it out to me?

The Trapezium is easily visible in this amateur image by the CHART32 team.

Nitpicker wrote:Not enough Moon shots.

You are correct but that is about to change. Moon Shot one is available now. Two and three too.

And of course while you're watching...

Fred the Cat wrote:And of course while you're watching...

Needs a dash of Worcestershire, sea salt and fresh ground pepper, olives for garnish

bystander wrote:

Fred the Cat wrote:And of course while you're watching...

Needs a dash of Worcestershire, sea salt and fresh ground pepper, olives for garnish

Num num num

starsurfer wrote:

Visual_Astronomer wrote:

Ann wrote:Even I can see some new things in it. The Trapezium looks like an angry gnome with spiky hair, or a tornado that is spitting saliva in all directions, while the M43 region resembles one of the red or white spots of Jupiter.

Ann

The Orion Nebula is without doubt one of the most outstanding visual targets in our sky. I never tire of looking at it, despite having seen it countless times in over 50 years of viewing.

I must admit, though, that this photo baffles me. Despite the use of visible data, this image is so different from what one actually sees through a scope that I can't seem to find the Trapezium.

Ann, could you or someone else point it out to me?

The Trapezium is easily visible in this amateur image by the CHART32 team.

Thanks Ann and starsurfer. I know where to look but I still am having a hard time finding the the familiar four stars. I have seen them many times through a scope, as well as their fainter E & F companions, but I can't find them in this picture!

Visual_Astronomer wrote:
I know where to look but I still am having a hard time finding the the familiar four stars. I have seen them many times through a scope, as well as their fainter E & F companions, but I can't find them in this picture!

That's because you can't see the four stars of the Trapezium in this picture!

The sky looks so different in infrared light than in visual light. Remember that the Trapezium stars are very hot. Infrared sensors are very bad at picking out hot sources. Like someone said about the new James Webb telescope, which will be incredibly sensitive to infrared wavelengths but will be bad at seeing hot sources - James Webb may be able to spot new supernovas. Or not.

When I said, in one of my posts, that the Trapezium looks so different in the APOD, I meant that the Trapezium region looks so different, and that the dust patterns are interesting. I can see now that my choice of words was confusing.

Anyway, check out this infrared (WISE) image of the Pleiades. All the brightest stars in the Pleiades are (relatively) hot, although much cooler than the four stars of the Trapezium. But the dusty nebula of the Pleiades is cool, and WISE really makes it stand out. But it is not that easy to spot the familiar configuration of the stars of the Pleiades in the WISE image.

Ann

EDIT: I said that infrared sensors are very bad at picking out hot sources. I should amend that by saying that infrared sensors can only sense infrared light, whether it comes from hot or cool sources. But cool sources emit most of their energy as infrared light, whereas hot sources emit very little of their energy as infrared light. Therefore hot sources typically look faint in infrared images.

Ann wrote:

Visual_Astronomer wrote:
I know where to look but I still am having a hard time finding the the familiar four stars. I have seen them many times through a scope, as well as their fainter E & F companions, but I can't find them in this picture!

That's because you can't see the four stars of the Trapezium in this picture!

The sky looks so different in infrared light than in visual light. Remember that the Trapezium stars are very hot. Infrared sensors are very bad at picking out hot sources. Like someone said about the new James Webb telescope, which will be incredibly sensitive to infrared wavelengths but will be bad at seeing hot sources - James Webb may be able to spot new supernovas. Or not.

When I said, in one of my posts, that the Trapezium looks so different in the APOD, I meant that the Trapezium region looks so different, and that the dust patterns are interesting. I can see now that my choice of words was confusing.

Anyway, check out this infrared (WISE) image of the Pleiades. All the brightest stars in the Pleiades are (relatively) hot, although much cooler than the four stars of the Trapezium. But the dusty nebula of the Pleiades is cool, and WISE really makes it stand out. But it is not that easy to spot the familiar configuration of the stars of the Pleiades in the WISE image.

Ann

EDIT: I said that infrared sensors are very bad at picking out hot sources. I should amend that by saying that infrared sensors can only sense infrared light, whether it comes from hot or cool sources. But cool sources emit most of their energy as infrared light, whereas hot sources emit very little of their energy as infrared light. Therefore hot sources typically look faint in infrared images.

Thanks, Ann. I was pretty sure that was the case, but thought your eagle-eye may have been picking up something I wasn't!

Something seems a little Illogical; in explaining the temperatures of infrared graphs in Picture of the Day May 17, 2016